As much as I’ve tried to avoid it, political news, gossip, issues, dilemmas, debates, scandals; politics is everywhere. I voted in my states primaries last Tuesday and recognized that although we tend to recognize that local elections and government officials have a far greater impact on our day to day life than who is president, we don’t really educate ourselves on what local candidates to vote for (what’s an Associate Justice do anyways?). That’s only been one of my latest questions that has arisen. I’ve made an effort to listen intently to people I respect on both sides of the aisle (including that third side that wants to abstain from voting), listening to people far more politically knowledgeable and wise then me have caused a lot of questions to raise in my mind. Ones I haven’t found answers for.

So, I’d like to employ your help. These are questions, not arguments for or against. Just things that have begun to arise in my questioning of politics on both sides of things. They aren’t an exhaustive list, but they are what have been on my mind. Remember, the stakes are high. I’ve got one vote.

For the Republican leaning folks…

• It seems to be the same religious right that wants to enforce their moral code of outlawing gay marriage, bringing prayer back to schools, outlawing abortion and teaching creationism are also huge fans of Sarah Palin. But, aren’t a lot of those religious right folks also against women in leadership (in the church)? Why do they believe so many of their religious moral codes extend to politics and society, and yet their views on women in leadership don’t? (I’m not saying women shouldn’t be in leadership, I’m just saying it seems like a double standard or a lack of consistent application of the principles they seem to uphold)
• Also, regarding inconsistencies, how a group can be so “pro-life” but support things like war and capital punishment? And I’d maybe through global poverty in to the mix too.

For you democrat-leaners…

• I’m all about caring for the poor and loving our neighbor and all that, I think it’s one of our primary callings as people of faith. However, I’m starting to wonder if there is a biblical justification or even legitimate Christian argument for encouraging our government to carry out those needs? I know the church isn’t doing its job, but that doesn’t necessarily mean the government should.
• The Democrats, along with the nominee, have been cast as heartless baby-killers, and though I don’t think that’s the truth, it makes it difficult to find a thoughtful explanation for some of the decisions being made in the liberal camp. For both those who believe life starts at conception and those that don’t, are there concise and thoughtful explanations for supporting the democratic platform? What about explanations as to why Obama voted against the Born Alive bill (basically I’m looking for a response to this)?

These are serious and legitimate questions, I’m not trying to trap anyone, I’m really just trying to understand. So, feel free to leave a comment below, or email me directly with your responses. Thanks.

(photo credit)

So, for a number of random reasons, I need to take more of a break from regular blogging. I’ve taken sporadic breaks in the past. And more recently I cut down the daily posting to weekday posting. Well, now I’m going to try and cut things back even more. So in a sense, this is a bit of a goodbye.

I’m currently thinking of cutting back to one post a week. This wouldn’t be a YouTubesday post, I’m stopping those, at least not weekly (unless you protest), but I’ll post good videos here on tumblr. And it wouldn’t be book reviews either, I’m considering moving those to some facebook book app or somewhere else (maybe librarything or even amazon). My goal would be to have one thoughtful, original piece of my own writing on some topic, maybe occasionally multiple topics. That’s what I’m leaning toward at the moment.

I’ll still be writing a lot, and if your interested in seeing and giving constructive feedback on top secret work-in-progress writing, then let me know and maybe I’ll let you into my secret chamber. Otherwise, just keep your rss or email subscription, but except things with a bit less frequency. That is unless I get the bug and just can’t stay away. (you might see a redesign as well)

After a handful of emails regarding last weeks post and comment threads, and reading through them again, I guess I’ll have to conclude that I tried and failed, but it was worth a shot. I wanted to give one more try to clarify two things: what I was trying to get at in the posts last week and what my current position is.

My intention last week was to try and move beyond dialoging about the specific issue of abortion itself and discuss ways that we could support women in general. Apparently no one seemed interested in having that conversation, no matter what we stipulated about when life begins it still came down to debating specifically abortion. I’ve met loving caring people who value life on both sides of this issue. I’d love to try and help those people find common ground on the many issues surrounding abortion, like working toward reducing the number of unwanted pregnancies, or providing support for teen mothers, or providing more mother-friendly work environments and laws. I think if people from both sides could agree to disagree on the specifics of abortion itself, just beyond that I think we would find a huge amount of common ground that we could all band together to address.

My current position on abortion is not what you might assume it is from my recent posts. I am extremely pro-life (against killing in all circumstances). Yet I’m open to the possibility that not wanting to outlaw abortion does not conflict with that. I’m also willing to listen and consider both sides and question the assumptions that have been given to me about when “life” begins. I don’t think it makes me heartless or callous to be willing to consider other views, nor does it make me any less of a Bible believing Christ follower. Personally, I would never recommend a woman have an abortion, rather I’d provide every viable means of support I can for them to go through with the pregnancy.

This has clearly been one of those hot button issues and I’m disappointed we couldn’t find a way to dialog about the surrounding complexities and find some common ground. I think one thing we all can agree on is that we must work hard to address the injustices that women, particularly mothers, face in our society. And another is that every child in our society should have their basic needs met and cared for regardless of the wealth or abilities of their parents: clothing, shelter, food, education. Let’s work together to meet those ends.

Anne Lamott is a fabulous writer. She has the ability to take the stories of her life, ordinary stories, and not only make them engaging, but inspiring. When I read Traveling Mercies I closed it with a new found appreciation for the day to day experiences of my own life. Reading Plan B: Further Thoughts on Faith, by Anne Lamott, was no different.

I didn’t tab this book very much, and I read through it so fast that I didn’t think to mark quotes to share, so I’d just recommend you pick up the whole thing and read it through. She makes a number of references in here to her distaste for George Bush, which might turn some people off, but it’s geniune.  She has a whole chapter on her experience with trying to follow her pastors admonishment to “love your enemies”, in which she happens to choose George to work on loving more.

It’s also interesting to read from a parenting perspective, as this collection of essays contains a lot about her son as he’s growing older and entering his teenage years. Her previous book talked about him at a younger age. The opportunity to follow them through a journey of parenting, an honest journey where everyone isn’t smiling all the time, is refreshing. It lets you know that your not alone, and that you’ll make it through the good and the bad.

It appears Lamott’s received both praise and criticism from the evangelical community. Praise for her honesty, criticism for her stance on abortion. In light of our recent conversations, I’m hoping to read more of her thoughts on the topic of abortion and others responses to it to gain more perspective on the issue.

I remember some evangelism training thing somewhere were the technique was suggested of challenging a person to accept Jesus on the grounds that if they were wrong it would mean eternity in Hell, so it probably wasn’t worth the risk. Don’t know how I feel about that tactic now, but for those (could include me) who don’t currently consider abortion as infanticide, I’m going to ask you to consider the “what if” today. We’ve dialoged already with the assumption that life begins at birth. Today we are going to dialog with the stipulation that life begins at conception. Tomorrow will discuss from a Biblical perspective when we believe “life” begins, but today we are going to, for the sake of productive dialog, stipulate that life begins at conception.

I believe the two things I mentioned Monday still apply to today’s conversation.

• Men should yield the floor to their better half and allow women to lead the decision making as it relates to pregnancy, abortion and women’s rights. We need to support them whole heartedly in their decisions, but do all we can to support and not unduly influence.
• We need to address the grave injustices that continue to face women in our country today. Equal Pay, paid maternity leave and better support for working and nursing mothers. Taking a stand against domestic and sexual abuse.  And removing discriminating stereotypes and media create pervasive struggles with body image for our young girls.

As to the issue of abortion itself. Assuming life begins at conception, abortion is murder. But, we must admit that it is unlike any other form of murder, it is unique in the relationship and physical connectedness of the mother and child. I am not saying that to diminish the value of the child, but to simply acknowledge that it is unique and should be considered as such. We think and respond differently to a suicide, an assisination or a fatal accident, though all involve the lose of life.

Is there a way to think of and respond to the situation, to consider the mother and child and the gravity of the situation that does not diminish the intensity of the situation, but also respects the values and rights of both the mother and child?

Okay, so the email forwards recently about Obama are driving me crazy. Not from a political perspective, but from a “I’m ashamed to call my self a Christian and align myself with these people” sort of perspective. Anways, I figured I’d add to the religious cynicism and give some folks a few videos to find amusing or get angry at. Your choice.

First, a trailer for Religulous, seems interesting…

Then some late night Christian Television clips…

And finally a great monologue on using the Old Testament in modern day life, from the West Wing (also quoted in Jesus for President).

My opinion on Standardized testing didn’t come from the Alfie Kohn book I just read, but I think he does an excellent job of addressing many of testings downfalls. Here is a concise list of facts from Standardized Testing and it’s Victims:

1. Our children are tested to an extent that is unprecedented in our history and unparalleled anywhere else in the world.
2. Noninstructional factors explain most of the variance among test scores when schools or districts are compared.
3. Norm-referenced tests were never intended to measure the quality of learning or teaching.
4. Standardized-test scores often measure superficial thinking.
5. Virtually all specialists condemn the practice of giving standardized tests to children younger than 8 or 9 years old.
6. Virtually all relevant experts and organizations condemn the practice of basing important decisions, such as graduation or promotion, on the results of a single test.
7. The time, energy, and money that are being devoted to preparing students for standardized tests have to come from somewhere.
8. Many educators are leaving the field because of what is being done to schools in the name of “accountability” and “tougher standards.”

Basically the main point being made is that standardized testing is not only useless in it’s intended goal of “keeping schools accountable” it’s actually very detrimental to education as a whole (students, teachers, schools, etc). Kohn goes on to discuss some of the implications of this system, but I think this is enough for a discussion to begin. If you have any questions on the Facts above, read the article, there is a paragraph or so on each one and will give you a better understanding of the point being made.

What are your thoughts on standardized testing?

I read a fascinating book by Alfie Kohn last week, which included an essay titled, Five Reasons to Stop Saying “Good Job!” and it definitely made me think critically about how and why we praise kids. I’ll include a brief paragraph and then just the bullet point reasons (with some supporting text), but it would be good for you to read the whole article (it’s not very long).

Lest there be any misunderstanding, the point here is not to call into question the importance of supporting and encouraging children, the need to love them and hug them and help them feel good about themselves. Praise, however, is a different story entirely. Here’s why.

1. Manipulating children. Suppose you offer a verbal reward to reinforce the behavior of a two-year-old who eats without spilling, or a five-year-old who cleans up her art supplies. Who benefits from this? Is it possible that telling kids they’ve done a good job may have less to do with their emotional needs than with our convenience?
2. Creating praise junkies. Rather than bolstering a child’s self-esteem, praise may increase kids’ dependence on us. The more we say, “I like the way you….” or “Good ______ing,” the more kids come to rely on our evaluations, our decisions about what’s good and bad, rather than learning to form their own judgments. It leads them to measure their worth in terms of what will lead us to smile and dole out some more approval.
3. Stealing a child’s pleasure. Apart from the issue of dependence, a child deserves to take delight in her accomplishments, to feel pride in what she’s learned how to do. She also deserves to decide when to feel that way. Every time we say, “Good job!”, though, we’re telling a child how to feel.
4. Losing interest. “Good painting!” may get children to keep painting for as long as we keep watching and praising. But, warns Lilian Katz, one of the country’s leading authorities on early childhood education, “once attention is withdrawn, many kids won’t touch the activity again.” Indeed, an impressive body of scientific research has shown that the more we reward people for doing something, the more they tend to lose interest in whatever they had to do to get the reward.
5. Reducing achievement. As if it weren’t bad enough that “Good job!” can undermine independence, pleasure, and interest, it can also interfere with how good a job children actually do. Researchers keep finding that kids who are praised for doing well at a creative task tend to stumble at the next task – and they don’t do as well as children who weren’t praised to begin with.

You can read the complete article here.

I find myself agreeing with the majority of his points, though I think he might be taking it to an extreme (my opinion is still definitely out on this one). What are your thoughts?

How to Tell People They Sound Racist

First, if you haven’t heard of the famous 1968 Olympics Salute you should. Here’s a brief informative video about Tommie Smith and John Carlos.

Never heard of Peter Norman? I didn’t even know he had any active involvement in the famous “Salute”, but turns out he agreed to where a Olympians for Human Rights pin. I don’t know if he did anything else, but that simple act got him banned from the Australian Olympic team forever. Here’s a nicely done trailer for a documentary about him:

I’m not quite sure how “hot button” Education actually is in most people’s minds, but it’s an extremely important issue to me and thus one I felt worth to talk about in the political realm. Some of our earlier conversations got us into asking the question of what should be a government run entity. Some would say just military, police, maybe roads and a few other things. Others would say everything from healthcare to the airlines. In a conversation with someone last weekend it was mentioned that some of the skepticism about the benefit or success of government run programs has been what people look at as the “failure or public education.” Whether or not this is true (that it is a failure, or that that is where the skepticism comes from), I think it’s important to talk about as an issue and as it relates to politics.

I believe public education is necessary

The effort to privatize education and to create a voucher system are both things I feel are extremely dangerous for the good of our communities. On the surface they seem like possible solutions, but both in my gut and in the evidence and direction I’ve seen, they appear a dangerous alternative to community based public schools. The capitalist notion of competition can work wonders when your producing a product to sell, but education and a childs learning and developmental growth is not a product to sell or market. Children are our future and it is important that we share the responsibility of providing a solid education for all of them.

I do not believe these initiatives are driven by those valuing the best interest of our students, I think it is driven by corporations and industry greedily interested in expanding their profits. There is plenty of evidence to build conspiracy theories in this direction.

Inequality in public education perpetuates the racial disparities that have existed in our country since slavery

We are barely a generation past the Civil Rights movement that ushered in policy changes like Brown V. Board and the Civil Rights Act. Even with these national changes, inequality in public schools has been slow to change. There is both well documented statistics and reports as well as plenty of anecdotal stories of the poor public school systems in many of the urban communities in our country today.

I feel like the quiet undertone of the education debate is one of race, at least that has been my impression. When people talk about “failing schools” they are primarily pointing to inner city schools full of low-income minority students. And what I hear coming across in their critiques are racial stereotypes, biases and prejudices. Maybe it’s just me but I have a strong feeling it is not.

I just finished a book recently by Alfie Kohn who writes some fascinating insights into the education system. I’m going to quote some of what he’s written and try and create a dialog around in later this week.